Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (58566)	3/2/2005 1:15:23 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Neither of your definitions of peace seems to suffice for the kind of peace I was referring to. Peace of mind, is an individual journey. And absence of conflict does not adequately define it either. Unfortunately Iraq is a land of conflict. Those conflicts were there before the US invasion. Was there peace before the war? Relatively speaking yes. Was there tyranny before the war, yes. If you define the end of tyranny as the removal of Saddam, then it has ended. Do we have peace yet? No we do not have peace. We have a civil war now. The American presence cannot defuse that war. While Americans are targets too in this civil war, the primary combatants are Sunni's and Shia. Control of the country is at issue. Also the Kurds have a stake, bit so far they have remained out of the conflict between the Sunni and Shia. So there is civil war now...it's not waiting for the US to end occupation. But when we do leave there will be civil war, until the balance of power is redefined. Under Saddam, the balance of power was defined. We lopped off his head and stirred the pot...now a new power struggle will emerge. I really don't see the Sunni deciding to let the Shia rule them, do you? A far better approach to the whole mess in Iraq would have been to not invade. we cannot undo that screw up...now can we? So now we need a new plan. Bush has no plan, except to maintain the existing force there which is not large enough to keep the civil unrest at bay. We will continually be a target of both the Sunni and the Shia...neither group really wants American presence. Although currently the Shia find it to their advantage to have the US there. So is it better to have a Shia controlled islamic theocracy or a Sunni controlled secular Iraq? I'm not sure which route is best to tell you the truth. It's crap shoot. The Shia are closer to the Iranians...who are pursuing a nuclear program. The only thing we have done for sure in Iraq is upset the balance of power. If we go back to before the war and ask the Powell Doctrine questions: Well defined objective. Overwhelming force. Broad coalition. Exit plan. We find that none of these wise elements of warfare were considered. That is why we find ourselves in no better situation in Iraq today. Peace? For Iraq, we'll have to consider it in relative terms. Is it more peaceful in Iraq today? What are the prospects for peace tomorrow? What is the plan to achieve that peace? A plan for peace will need to include the rest of the world. Bush has pissed off the rest of the world. So the first step is to regain the confidence and trust of our allies. To understand the realities of the world. There are other huge and powerful countries, Russia and China which need to be brought into the tent. Peace is larger than Iraq. But in order to have peace in Iraq we need to understand everyone's perspective, and craft a world solution. A coming together of nations in common interests of peace and prosperity will be the foundation. Not just in Iraq but in the world. That is why it is essential that we work with the world community to craft the solution for peace in Iraq. And most importantly it has to be a solution that the Iraqi people want. With out a doubt, if we worked more closely with Arab nations, Russia, Germany, China, France and all other European countries, Japan, Australia...all the peace loving nations of the world...we'd be far closer to peace in Iraq and in the world today. With this administration relationships have been fractured. And this is a major part of what is keeping us from getting to a peaceful solution in Iraq. A peaceful solution would include members of the Arab community and Nato and the UN working in concert to bring peace to Iraq. Bush turned his back on the world, though he now seems to be making overtures to reopen the discussion. Getting that done will be paramount to bringing peace to Iraq. and ensuring a peaceful world. We're going to need a new round of open and frank discussion with our world partners. Quite frankly I don't think we have the right team in Washington to get that done. Condi Rice is not a diplomat. She's already turned her back on Canada because they opted out of the missile defence. She turned an opportunity to broaden the discussion on that topic into a snub. That is not diplomacy. It's school yard bully tactics. I'm forever an optimist. I'm optimistic that we can make it through the next 4 years without widening conflict in the world...by which time the only option for a more peaceful world will be to elect a democrat for president. Mr. Biden would make an excellent choice IMHO. Orca